50-200 or 55-300 ?

Started Dec 9, 2009 | Discussions thread
HMayling Regular Member • Posts: 148
Re: 50-200 or 55-300 ?

I had the 50-200. It always seemed to be short of what I wanted. Now my two zooms cover the whole range of normal walk-around needs. My Sigma 17-70 macro with the Pentax 55-300 is a good sharp set of lenses. Almost any need I can think of that isn't covered is a specialty item. Super telephoto if you're a serious birder, or heavy duty sports require a very large very expensive tripod only telephoto. If you can find a few specialty used kmount primes you have just about every possibility covered. If you have these and take good pictures, you are a photographer. I cannot justify spending thousands of dollars for a lens if it isn't paying you. Remember, it's your eye and understanding of your tools that make great pics.
--
Lord help me to consistently follow my own advice.

K10D, Sigma 17-70, Pentax 55-300, 50mm/1.4 SMC Takumar, Minolta manual 50mm macro lens. Pentax 2.8mm/f2.8manual K-mount, Pentax 360 flash, 4 old flashes and a pile of accessories. Pentax bellows and 100mm bellows lens.

 HMayling's gear list:HMayling's gear list
Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow